9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal Centre / Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC/ CIT(A)] has erred in dismissing the appeal and confirming the additions made by the Assessing officer. 2. Reassessment proceedings bad in law a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO and further Ld.NFAC / CIT(A) erred in reopening the assessment; the reassessment proceedings are bad in law and liable to be quashed. b) Without prejudice to above, the notice u/s 148A(b), the order u/s 148A(d), and the reopening notice u/s 148 has been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing officer instead of Faceless Assessing officer, and hence the reassessment proceedings are beyond jurisdiction and void-ab-initio. c) Without prejudice to above, the notice u/s 148A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irm, filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19 declaring income at Rs. 3,710/-. Assessing Officer received information through insight portal of department that assessee has sold a property for a sale consideration of Rs. 19,50,000/-. Market value of the property was as determined by Stamp Valuation Authorities was at Rs. 44,61,622/-. As there is difference between the sale consideration and the market value [probably assessed by the in stamp value authority] to be of Rs. 25,11,622/-, therefore the provision of section 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act") could attracts. Assessing Officer on going through return of income of assessee, find that the assessee has not included such transaction in its return of income and has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... District valuation officer (DVO). The DVO estimated the valued the property at Rs. 25,09,022/-. On receipt of valuation report from DVO, the assessee was asked to submit its objection (clarification) about the valuation report. The Assessing Officer recorded that assessee failed to submit his objection. The Assessing Officer on the basis of report of DVO made addition of Rs. 5,59,022/- [25,09,022 - 19,50,000] under section 56(2) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A). Before Ld.CIT(A), assessee challenged the validity of reopening under section 147 of the Act as well as addition on merit. The Assessee also filed its written submissions. The Assessee in his submission s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as determined as on 01.06.2019 instead of actual date of purchase, the Ld. CIT(A) held that there is a difference between the stamp duty value and the consideration then difference between the value determined by stamp duty authority and sale consideration is to be added in the income in the year consideration. The DVO has considered all the relevant material and information related to prevailing market conditions of the area. Thus the action of the Assessing Officer is in accordance with law. On the objection of assessee that no fair and proper opportunity was given, Ld.CIT(A) held that details available on record shows that sufficient opportunities of being heard was provided to the assessee to furnish all supporting documents. The matter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Thus, Assessing Officer passed order under section 148A(d) without verification of facts. Once the basis of issuance of notice itself is wrong the action thereon is void ab-initio. The assessee in response to order under section 148A(d) of the Act, in its reply dated 08.02.2023 clearly stated that they are not involved in any such transactions and that they have not sold any property and that a wrong notice has been issued to them. The assessee prayed for dropping the reopening. Right from the beginning the assessee has raised objection against the wrong information. 6. On merits, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that DVO while estimating the fair market value of the asset has not considered various factors. He has not given comparable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not entitled for any further relief. 8. I have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and I have gone though the orders of lower authorities carefully. Firstly, I shall consider the submissions of the parties on validity of reopening. I find that the case of assessee was reopened on the basis of information in the insight portal. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice to the assessee to explain the facts vide notice dated 18.03.20122, but the assessee failed to make any response. Again order under section 148A(a) was passed and notice under section 148 was issued. The assessee again failed to file return of income in the time allowed in te notice under section 148. Even no objection was raised against reopening. In my ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
